EVE Search - Remove Local

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Remove Local

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:24:00 - [1] Local as an intelligence tool is incredibly lame. Removing it will make the game more challenging for both hunter and prey. It'll be easier to hide, and harder to spot people sneaking. It'll make a real profession out of recon, surveillance and spying, and make ambushes viable. There is absolutely zero reason for local to exist. It benefits no one but the very extreme carebear or very extreme lazy-pirate. Just remove it already.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:26:00 - [2] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/12/2006 00:26:14 Let people CLOSE local, so they don't have to see it. Thanks CCP! Oh, and for reasons local exists, let's start with the word "communuity". Thanks. //Maya
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:30:00 - [3] You are completely aware of what "Remove Local" means Maya and it has nothing to do with removing the ability to chat with other people in the system.
Oedus Caro Caldari Caldari Deep Space Ventures	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:32:00 - [4] There are good reasons on either side of the debate... In my opinion, the solution is quite simple: Remove Local channels from those systems having security below 0.5 - for the die-hard role players, think of it as a CONCORD service, just like gate security and system policing. That way high-traffic systems at the heart of empire retain that "community" feel, and low-sec becomes more anonymous, as it should be.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:32:00 - [5] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/12/2006 00:33:32 Yes, it has everything to do with that, because anyone stupid enough to chat would be kicked from any corp with a clue. And that's one of many points. Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. "As it should be" IF you want to kill any semblence of "game" in Eve, yes. As it should be to travel for hours without any feel of being arround anyone else, of spending an evening fruitnessly hunting for people who left hours ago, getting invisible lagspikes from fleets you can't detect killing you...etc. I prefer Eve to be FUN, thanks! If local stops you killing people, that's your personal skill issues. NOT the game's fault. //Maya
EvilTwin I Implant Liberation Front	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:32:00 - [6] "local chat" is just as importend as Tech II and "Friends"
EvilTwin I Implant Liberation Front	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:33:00 - [7] going to high sec empire with an Alt ..And read/chat local can be extremly fun
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:37:00 - [8] Quote: Yes, it has everything to do with that, because anyone stupid enough to chat would be kicked from any corp with a clue. And that's one of many points. Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. How does removing local make 0.0 less viable? You can't see people, and people can't see you the moment they jump in. How many random gank squads will go around and scan every system from one end to the other just to kill a lone miner? Answer: very few. Removing local benefits the lone miner who would otherwise be hunted down. And you can have your "sense of community" (lol) after you ambush someone, or when you're not in any danger of exposing yourself, or simply by joining specific channels for socializing instead of local. From what I can see from your other posts, you seem to be very tense tonight Maya. Maybe you should take a break for a while
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:43:00 - [9] Since you edited your post; Quote: "As it should be" IF you want to kill any semblence of "game" in Eve, yes. As it should be to travel for hours without any feel of being arround anyone else, of spending an evening fruitnessly hunting for people who left hours ago, getting invisible lagspikes from fleets you can't detect killing you...etc. Thats your personal skill issues Maya. If you can use your scanner and take the extra time (a minute maybe?) to look around instead of browsing local for targets in a FPSeqsue manner, the absence of local isn't the problem. Your extremely lazy ADHD mentality is. Quote: I prefer Eve to be FUN, thanks! If local stops you killing people, that's your personal skill issues. NOT the game's fault. I prefer EVE to be fun too Maya! I don't want a pirate to jump into the system I'm peacefully mining in, and instantly know I'm there! I'd prefer the ability to hide! Oh, thats not about me killing people is it? Seriously Maya, your arguments are twice as worse than usual when you're posting just for the sake of it.
Yarek Balear The Initiative	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:43:00 - [10] One of the first things that struck me when I started EVE many moons ago was the feeling of community. Part of this was seeing players in local and getting a feeling that I could interact with other players at any point in time. This is an important feature for new players joining the game or people that aren't PVPing all the time. So... What about removing local updates when you are in 0.0 ? Set it so that if you are in 0.0 you only see what's typed and only see players names that have typed in while you were there. In empire, keep it as is. Just a kind of half-way house...
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:46:00 - [11] Quote: One of the first things that struck me when I started EVE many moons ago was the feeling of community. Part of this was seeing players in local and getting a feeling that I could interact with other players at any point in time. This is an important feature for new players joining the game or people that aren't PVPing all the time. So... What about removing local updates when you are in 0.0 ? Set it so that if you are in 0.0 you only see what's typed and only see players names that have typed in while you were there. In empire, keep it as is. Just a kind of half-way house... That is an option but you assume that empire space is excluded from PvP. This isn't true with corp wars and such. Also, there are plenty of channels for everything you can imagine, more than enough to substitute for local. Also, if you want to talk to people, all you have to do is type and wait for someone to reply! It doesn't remove any sense of community, it just removes the super-intelligence factor.
Chian XinLian	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:46:00 - [12] Removing local would mean hard time for prey - damn easy time for hunter. Currently probes are **** easy to use by anyone - they find your target fast and easy (ask any lowsec mission runner how they feel about it) Also, if someone would be ratting.. Hunter hops into system , ratter is totally un-aware of him until that hunter scanned him in a second from belt and is about next allready banging damage.. So nope, removing local wouldnt cut it unless probes would be tampered with and scanner possibly completely removed..
Extinctor Fortis Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:46:00 - [13] I agree, local should not be a tactical tool, and optional for the user to broadcast themselves.. No one really uses it for chat in low sec systems anyways. Corporations have corpchat, alliances have alliance chat, and allied alliances have joint channels - assuming they aren't all using Teamspeak in the first place. I think it would create more immersion, and excitement. EVE is just so boring when you don't have to work for information. It puts everyone on the same playing field, when clearly, not everyone is of the same skill. And without losers, there are no winners.
Samurai1	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:49:00 - [14] currently local shows whos outlaws and anyone you have good/bad standings with your corporation. Some how i dont think ccp are going anywhere near to what you would like to plan.
Oedus Caro Caldari Caldari Deep Space Ventures	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:51:00 - [15] Originally by: Semper Sanguis [Removing local] ...has nothing to do with removing the ability to chat with other people in the [same] system. Certainly it does not remove the ability to chat with other people in the same system, but it does facilitate it greatly. I got to know most of my current friends and acquaintances via spontaneous chats with them in the local channel, chats which would probably have never occurred, had I not seen beforehand that other people were in the channel. I think this is why local as it exists today is superior to the "anonymous-without-speech" version that has occasionally been proposed. My suggestion would preserve this community window where it shines - high security systems. In low security and 0.0 systems, most people are generally going to be doing things with other people who are in or allied to their corporation, in which case local is much less useful as a social tool.
Imba Bambi	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:51:00 - [16] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/12/2006 00:33:32 Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. "As it should be" IF you want to kill any semblence of "game" in Eve, yes. As it should be to travel for hours without any feel of being arround anyone else, of spending an evening fruitnessly hunting for people who left hours ago, getting invisible lagspikes from fleets you can't detect killing you...etc. I prefer Eve to be FUN, thanks! If local stops you killing people, that's your personal skill issues. NOT the game's fault. Here we go again, the old risk vs reward argument. You can always increase rewards by fixing droprates, increasing mission payoff in 0.0, whatever. Thus risk vs reward is no valid argument here, but only whether local is a good tool by itself. And btw, you can no longer have newb accounts online at the same time as your main. Also, there are many suggestions that will fix the community problem, for example 2 minute delayed local appearance and constellation chat. People who are hunting dont want to chat in the first moments either way, people who just fly through wont have along chat other than hi, and everybody elsecan still talk under these rules. Community chat should never be forced upon players who want to play a hide and seek game. Constellation chat will see to it that you never feel alone, and that you know that the enemy miner/fleet is somewhere out there. Actually, it will greatly encourage teamplay of different hunting squads across systems.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 00:55:00 - [17] Quote: Certainly it does not remove the ability to chat with other people in the same system, but it does facilitate it greatly. I got to know most of my current friends and acquaintances via spontaneous chats with them in the local channel, chats which would probably have never occurred, had I not seen beforehand that other people were in the channel. I think this is why local as it exists today is superior to the "anonymous-without-speech" version that has occasionally been proposed. My suggestion would preserve this community window where it shines - high security systems. In low security and 0.0 systems, most people are generally going to be doing things with other people who are in or allied to their corporation, in which case local is much less useful as a social tool. As I said, local is hardly the only way to chat. There are plenty of channels for specific purposes, for specific groups etc. And again, you can declare yourself in local just like you did before. Removing local does nothing but add to immersion and strategy.
Quivox Alkar ORUS Corporate United Corporations of Eve	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:05:00 - [18] Edited by: Quivox Alkar on 04/12/2006 01:05:50 I think the best option is to only show in local who talks. So, if you are in the system and drop a line in local, you will appear visible to whom is at the same system. If you leave the system, you disappear from local (so that people won't be talking to a wall).
Extinctor Fortis Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:06:00 - [19] I am very happy others have recognized this as well. Usually such threads get trolled by individuals who enjoy having this advantage, and would fear losing it. I know some of my corpmates do not like hearing about it either, since they fear any sort of change. But at the end of the day, EVE is about interacting with players. And if you find socializing in local chat is your form of interaction, by all means - do it. But it should not come at the expense of so much potential. When I first came to EVE, I envisioned 0.0 would be mysterious and unknown. A lawless place where anything goes, anything can happen, and you never know what to expect. Its less like the wild wild west, and more like Chucky Cheese. Everyone gets a prize just for showing up.
Chian XinLian	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:10:00 - [20] After thinking it a bit more. Removing local would require a lot of overhaul in current map system too. Removing local would require removing any statistical data from map about systems (pilots in space past 30min, pilots docked and active, etc)
Coasterbrian Celestial Fleet Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:10:00 - [21] No. Kthx. You are person number 348682349 to suggest this in the last three-plus years. Don't you think that if it was viable or inline with intended gameplay mechanics, CCP would have implemented it already? ---------- I say what I mean, but I don't always mean what I say.
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:15:00 - [22] Edited by: Razin on 04/12/2006 01:16:35 Originally by: Chian XinLian Removing local would mean hard time for prey - damn easy time for hunter. Currently probes are **** easy to use by anyone - they find your target fast and easy (ask any lowsec mission runner how they feel about it) Also, if someone would be ratting.. Hunter hops into system , ratter is totally un-aware of him until that hunter scanned him in a second from belt and is about next allready banging damage.. So nope, removing local wouldnt cut it unless probes would be tampered with and scanner possibly completely removed.. As a Local-nerf mitigation factor an active scan notification system could be added to the game. The system would notify you when someone is using the scanner or the scan probe that has you in its range. Actually this should be added anyway, as it only makes sense. That is, your active scanning should give you away. ...
Romeda Minmatar Trojan industries	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:18:00 - [23] sigh another "remove-local-topic" do we really need more?
Messiah Fong	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:27:00 - [24] As regards to "active" scanning, why not make it work like sonar? you don't get seen unless you active scan. If you are "quiet" you won't be detected. Integrate that with propulsion changes and such. A group of battleships moving together will be easily detected by a passive scanner. Just an idea if the devs want to give the whole system an overhaul. It probably needs lots of work.
Troy Knight	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:28:00 - [25] This is ridiculous, you want to make low sec space to have even less people moving around there? As it stands a pirate can jump on a lone miner,warp jam and kill without much problem at all. Local is the only way for an active dsplay to keep a heads up on those who play this game simply to be mean and shoot struggling players down. Until you can find another way to have that heads up that the Local give you, then I say keep it.--those who want to get rid of it don't want to have any resistance or hardship in getting their kills.
Extinctor Fortis Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:30:00 - [26] Originally by: Coasterbrian No. Kthx. You are person number 348682349 to suggest this in the last three-plus years. Don't you think that if it was viable or inline with intended gameplay mechanics, CCP would have implemented it already? Kinda like Titans, Jovians, Jumpdrives, and Empire Building. Eh? Just because it takes CCP years to get around to something, does not mean it isn't going to happen, and definitely does not mean it shouldn't. Addressing the local chat issue is more relevant than any of the features in Kali 1, Kali 2, Kali 3, EVE Vista, walking on stations, or planetary interaction. I am very suprised someone from the biggest 0.0 entity ingame would be abhorrently opposed to what is essentially more content for them.
St Dragon Blood Association of Dragons	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:30:00 - [27] Originally by: Messiah Fong As regards to "active" scanning, why not make it work like sonar? you don't get seen unless you active scan. If you are "quiet" you won't be detected. Integrate that with propulsion changes and such. A group of battleships moving together will be easily detected by a passive scanner. Just an idea if the devs want to give the whole system an overhaul. It probably needs lots of work. Do you know how much it costs to make one scan probe ----------------------------------------------- "Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god." -- Jean Rostand
Admai Sket	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:31:00 - [28] Originally by: Oedus Caro Remove Local channels from those systems having security below 0.5 - for the die-hard role players, think of it as a CONCORD service, just like gate security and system policing. That way high-traffic systems at the heart of empire retain that "community" feel, and low-sec becomes more anonymous, as it should be. THIS IS GOOD. /signed this post. --------- NEED A SIG PLEASE.
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:40:00 - [29] Originally by: Chian XinLian After thinking it a bit more. Removing local would require a lot of overhaul in current map system too. Removing local would require removing any statistical data from map about systems (pilots in space past 30min, pilots docked and active, etc) Yes. And this should already be removed from general access in 0.0. This info should only be available for alliances and only for systems they have sovereignty over. ...
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 01:44:00 - [30] Edited by: Razin on 04/12/2006 01:49:34 Originally by: Messiah Fong As regards to "active" scanning, why not make it work like sonar? you don't get seen unless you active scan. If you are "quiet" you won't be detected. Integrate that with propulsion changes and such. It's not just the sonar that works that way. Any active detection system has this drawback. And so it should in EVE. Your passive detector is the Overview. In addition to this maybe passive scan probes could be introduced with very limited range (same as the Overview) and a long life time (around 20-30 mins). ...
Allantia Caldari FW Inc	Posted - 2006.12.04 02:02:00 - [31] I would love to see the day that local could be removed from EVE, but unfortunately it would require the overhaul of more than a few gameplay mechanics, and I doubt CCP is willing to make such large changes. Besides, judging from the changes in the most recent patch, I would hazard a guess that the Devs disagree with you on the "lameness" of local.
Kun'mi	Posted - 2006.12.04 02:17:00 - [32] it would be a bit cooler, not knowing what is in the system with you (empty or 20 man pirate blob?) At the same time, local is an essential tool for low sec and 0.0 pvp. It also works both ways. You can see who is in local to kill them, but you can also run away from someone you see come into local. Removing local would just make things harder for everyone (though as stated, it may provide a sense of unpredictability and suspense to the game)
BoBoZoBo Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2006.12.04 03:27:00 - [33] Edited by: BoBoZoBo on 04/12/2006 03:28:03 Originally by: Oedus Caro There are good reasons on either side of the debate... In my opinion, the solution is quite simple: Remove Local channels from those systems having security below 0.5 - for the die-hard role players, think of it as a CONCORD service, just like gate security and system policing. That way high-traffic systems at the heart of empire retain that "community" feel, and low-sec becomes more anonymous, as it should be. EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You want people to feel like a community.. cool.. I am all for LOCAL in 0.5 and above. But PLEASE get rid of it in 0.0 and below... I mean.. How can I truly role play a covert ops ship when people know I am there!!!. It really makes no sence and is counterintuitive to the direction eve is going. Arent we getting voice chat anyway? ========================= Minister of Propaganda - Operator 9
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 04:32:00 - [34] Great, remove local, I'm all for it. Provided we get a proper scanning system in it's place. I want scans to be relativistic (only move at luminal speeds), scans to highlight the person trying to scan (massive pulse of EM would make you stand out) and the ability to use my gang mates or probes/drones to triangulate a scanning person's position. I want the ability to blow out chaff fields and drop dummy beacons to confuse people's sensors. Oh, and I want system wide or at least enormous asteroid belts. But, most people I know calling for local's removal don't actually want a system like this. Because a system like this would actually make their job really really hard. If you were a pirate, the miners would easily safe/dock when they detected your scanner emissions. Alliances would instantly see the idiot who jumps into system and launches an omnidirectional scan without ever revealing their own positions. To pirate, or raid, you'd actually have to be really really clever about it. Which would be awesome and take a lot of skill. But I don't think it's quite what those calling for local's removal have in mind.
Troy Knight	Posted - 2006.12.04 04:53:00 - [35] Originally by: James Duar Great, remove local, I'm all for it. Provided we get a proper scanning system in it's place. I want scans to be relativistic (only move at luminal speeds), scans to highlight the person trying to scan (massive pulse of EM would make you stand out) and the ability to use my gang mates or probes/drones to triangulate a scanning person's position. I want the ability to blow out chaff fields and drop dummy beacons to confuse people's sensors. Oh, and I want system wide or at least enormous asteroid belts. But, most people I know calling for local's removal don't actually want a system like this. Because a system like this would actually make their job really really hard. If you were a pirate, the miners would easily safe/dock when they detected your scanner emissions. Alliances would instantly see the idiot who jumps into system and launches an omnidirectional scan without ever revealing their own positions. To pirate, or raid, you'd actually have to be really really clever about it. Which would be awesome and take a lot of skill. But I don't think it's quite what those calling for local's removal have in mind. Actually the whole idea sounds good to me. Pirates job isn't that hard to begin with, especially their ganking abilities. The scanning method you proposed makes alot of sense, and I'd support that. This game has made it real easy for Pirates to be pirates and real hard for those who aren't pirates and try to solo-fly around or are forced to because they know nobody or anybody they know isn't available.
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Distant Star Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 05:55:00 - [36] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: Yes, it has everything to do with that, because anyone stupid enough to chat would be kicked from any corp with a clue. And that's one of many points. Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. How does removing local make 0.0 less viable? You can't see people, and people can't see you the moment they jump in. How many random gank squads will go around and scan every system from one end to the other just to kill a lone miner? Answer: very few. Removing local benefits the lone miner who would otherwise be hunted down. And you can have your "sense of community" (lol) after you ambush someone, or when you're not in any danger of exposing yourself, or simply by joining specific channels for socializing instead of local. From what I can see from your other posts, you seem to be very tense tonight Maya. Maybe you should take a break for a while Ganksquads after lone miners aren't even close to being the problem. If you remove local, you remove the one tool you have for spotting a hostile fleet bent on penetrating to your home systems and trashing ALL your support echelons. They can warp through and be in your central system without so much as raising a pip on the radarùeven the starmap's active pilots only shows an average of the last 30 mins: a 60 pilot fleet that takes 30 seconds to cross the system and get out might show as one or two pilots in system. Yes, you can have scouts sitting on the bottleneck gates into your region 23/7. But how is that fun? Who the heck would volunteer for that? Eve is a game, people play to have fun, not to sit around on sentry duty. There's a reason the Sunday comics make fun of soldiers falling asleep on sentry duty, even today; it sure as heck ain't because they've been exhausted by fun-ness overload. If you want to remove local, you have to come up with some other VIABLE alternative that people can use to spot hostiles. End of story. Now stop bishing for it until you have some ideas on that front!
Niccolado Starwalker	Posted - 2006.12.04 05:58:00 - [37] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Local as an intelligence tool is incredibly lame. Removing it will make the game more challenging for both hunter and prey. It'll be easier to hide, and harder to spot people sneaking. It'll make a real profession out of recon, surveillance and spying, and make ambushes viable. There is absolutely zero reason for local to exist. It benefits no one but the very extreme carebear or very extreme lazy-pirate. Just remove it already. It is difficult enough really getting people into low-sec an deep space, if you should not make it a hundred time worse by removing it. I say leave it. The pirates have lots of tools at hand anyway without having to ask for removal of such a great tool for everyone.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express The Guardian Coalition	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:07:00 - [38] I see no reason to remove local. If you remove local the game's population I think would plummet. Can the game sustain the loss of half its population. Over half the game's population is probably in the 'carebear' fashion that many scream about it. Like it or not their money is helping to keep the game going. Removing local would only benefit one group of people, pirates and that's it. Galactic Express Recruitment Post
Lisento Slaven Amarr The Drekla Consortium Kurai Komichi	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:12:00 - [39] The way local works right now ruins the whole hiding thing in EVE. The chat gives out a ton of information and that ruins any surprises. The moment people see someone jump into local they jump to their safespot or dock (just like before) and wait for them to pass. A lot of people would lose more ships and a lot of people would get more kills if local didn't automatically give info. I don't like the idea of automatically detecting ships entering a system because that defeats the purpose of removing local's intelligence effect. Maybe if there was a probe you could drop within 20km of a gate to get information when someone jumps in, sure. Whatever - I don't know what their plans are to do with local because if anything they gave it a super boost this patch. I'm all for seeing standings in local if it means getting rid of all those names in my addres book hehe. --- Lisento Slaven wants to be a Space Whaler in EVE. Put in space whales!
Sgt Napalm ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:12:00 - [40] How about...no? K tanks bye
Lisa Lightyear	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:21:00 - [41] IÆm not sure if you guys realise this, but people who live in 0.0 enjoy PVP'ing and having fleet fights, without local these things would simply not happen anymore. We have defence channels, we direct forces towards systems where hostiles are spotted in local, we engage them, they engage us, and we have fun. This is how we find each other in the middle of no-where. If CCP ever seriously consider removing this so empire players can come in and farm 0.0 space free of risk, IÆll probably end up letting my account lapse.
Kiyano	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:24:00 - [42] The problem with removing local is that it only makes a small percentage happy and annoys the greater community. So to put it simply, do a poll and come back with sufficent numbers or it wont happen.
Lithalnas Amarr Hadean Drive Yards	Posted - 2006.12.04 06:58:00 - [43] without local, how could we talk smack? ------------- Cadet Lithalnas - Logistics Division - Hadean Drive Yards
DiuxDium The Graduates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.04 07:02:00 - [44] I like this idea ALOT. Remove local, keep the ability to chat. Just remove the "Character" selection from local chat, easy as can be. Loads of fun.
Unknown Subject Sound of Silence	Posted - 2006.12.04 07:35:00 - [45] This is the first "remove local" thread where the arguement makes some valid points. I think low sec systems should have local removed, or at least have it like the help channel, you only show up if you talk. This would add some flavour to 0.0 and make pirates work a little harder. And there is no community via local in 0.0. There are friends and there are targets. I dont ever remember having a good old chat with someone neutral or red in local, i just tried finding them to kill them. It would certainly make people pay a bit more attention while travelling thru 0.0. Some flaws but some benifits. I think it would be fairly balanced.
Xorv	Posted - 2006.12.04 07:42:00 - [46] From my understanding it isn't a question of if CCP removes Local as an inteligence gathering tool, only when. CCP has already stated that the intend to change Local and that Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's only for chat. From my personal experience, once I learned the hard way and kept local up on my screen in it's own window I was 100% safe ratting in 0.0. Which is nice for me ratting, or mining if I ever did that, but it's really bad gameplay for a PvP game. Anyway, shout and scream all you like, we're all entitled to an opinion, but some time in the near future expect Local to go.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:26:00 - [47] Removing local straight does nothing but favor pirates, and hurts everyone else. Asteroid belts are small, discrete targets. It is guaranteed that anyone not a pirate in system is at one of them. All the pirate has to do is warp from belt to belt and then pop the miner/ratter when he finds one. The scanner is not a defense against this, it does not have the range, and frankly, clicking scan repeatedly for hours while doing something else that is also nominally pretty uninteresting is not my idea of fun. See above for how local could go and something more awesome replace it. But of course, that wouldn't favor the pirates so less of them clamor for it.
Verus Potestas Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:32:00 - [48] Compromise: make local constellation. And remove those bloody standing tags. Between corps atm, the NPC one is strictly a temporary thing. RAWR!111 Sig Hijackz0r!!11 - Immy
Lisa Lightyear	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:33:00 - [49] Originally by: Xorv From my understanding it isn't a question of if CCP removes Local as an inteligence gathering tool, only when. CCP has already stated that the intend to change Local and that Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's only for chat. Well...I can't wait to play eve blindfolded.
Doxs Roxs White Wolves Defence league The OSS	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:39:00 - [50] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: Yes, it has everything to do with that, because anyone stupid enough to chat would be kicked from any corp with a clue. And that's one of many points. Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. How does removing local make 0.0 less viable? You can't see people, and people can't see you the moment they jump in. How many random gank squads will go around and scan every system from one end to the other just to kill a lone miner? Answer: very few. Removing local benefits the lone miner who would otherwise be hunted down. And you can have your "sense of community" (lol) after you ambush someone, or when you're not in any danger of exposing yourself, or simply by joining specific channels for socializing instead of local. From what I can see from your other posts, you seem to be very tense tonight Maya. Maybe you should take a break for a while Are you even aware of the new scan probe changes? Imagine this: Ganksquad scout jumps into system, pops a probe and a bit more then a minute later knows if there is someone within 48AU, and to boot there is a good chance that the scout will get a direct jump in point to any mission runners since the new probes have a much better accuracy. If I am out to kill someone that is nice, but from a defenders point of view it is suicide. Since you will not know that you got someone in system untill they land on top of your sorry ass and kill you. Good luck trying to scan for probes btw, with the lag I usually get, doing a full range scan may well take over a minute or two. Not to mention how hard it will be to keep enemies out in 0.0 systems, where it already is quite hard. Unless you got a 24/7 bubblecamp going, now you tell me how viable that is? Regards /Doxs After 9 months, why is my face just a '!' ?
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:39:00 - [51] Originally by: Verus Potestas Compromise: make local constellation. Which is the same as removing local. No one uses constellation because a constellation is huge. Originally by: Verus Potestas And remove those bloody standing tags. ...were added because a huge amount of database load comes from people "Show Info" on everyone they see in local. And second of all - WHY!?!. If I took the effort to set someone to low standings why in god's name would my interface not tell me that they are low standing when I talk to them/see them. It was more absurd when they weren't there.
Siigari Kitawa Gallente HelpCorp United Eden's Fire	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:42:00 - [52] I HAVE THE SOLUTION REMOVE CHAT CHANNELS Am I right? :D
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express The Guardian Coalition	Posted - 2006.12.04 08:45:00 - [53] Originally by: James Duar Originally by: Verus Potestas Compromise: make local constellation. Which is the same as removing local. No one uses constellation because a constellation is huge. Originally by: Verus Potestas And remove those bloody standing tags. ...were added because a huge amount of database load comes from people "Show Info" on everyone they see in local. And second of all - WHY!?!. If I took the effort to set someone to low standings why in god's name would my interface not tell me that they are low standing when I talk to them/see them. It was more absurd when they weren't there. I believe they had planned to remove local initially in Kali1 however I also believe they approached it rationally and decided it would be more harmful to the game. Its just like in Alpha when there were no stargates, everything could jump from system to system. It was impossible to get any fights and the devs then came upon the stargate idea in order to create natural chokepoints where fighting could occur. It is possible local may change in some way but I don't believe EVE could survive its removal, it would be as harmful as the CU and later the NGE was to SWG. Galactic Express Recruitment Post
Fracking Beach	Posted - 2006.12.04 09:36:00 - [54] Nice ideas on this thread. Few toughts: Why not make an ON/OFF switch for "Local Communications Channel". This way if one wished to chat, be visible and participate in local chat, they switch a knob. This would make it possible to be either visible or invisible in local. Since probing is so easy now, having a active scan/probe warning would make sense. That's a good idea. But, I think passive scanning should also be possible, given it doesn't "locate" anything. If someone starts actively probing for location, it should activate a warning in other ships in system. The warning could also be an option (or on/off) type setting.
Plastic Moldman	Posted - 2006.12.04 10:22:00 - [55] Originally by: James Duar Great, remove local, I'm all for it. Provided we get a proper scanning system in it's place. I want scans to be relativistic (only move at luminal speeds), scans to highlight the person trying to scan (massive pulse of EM would make you stand out) and the ability to use my gang mates or probes/drones to triangulate a scanning person's position. I want the ability to blow out chaff fields and drop dummy beacons to confuse people's sensors. Oh, and I want system wide or at least enormous asteroid belts. But, most people I know calling for local's removal don't actually want a system like this. Because a system like this would actually make their job really really hard. If you were a pirate, the miners would easily safe/dock when they detected your scanner emissions. Alliances would instantly see the idiot who jumps into system and launches an omnidirectional scan without ever revealing their own positions. To pirate, or raid, you'd actually have to be really really clever about it. Which would be awesome and take a lot of skill. But I don't think it's quite what those calling for local's removal have in mind. Gotta say I like the sound of this idea. It would give EVE back some of that wild feeling it has lost. Only thing about it that scares me is the learning curve. I forsee me losing alot of ships learning how to do it right. Whoever commented about Local giving away Covops, I agree. Why not let the cloak hide you in local? And let you cloak while you still have the jump-in cloak so you don't even blip. I like local but for crying out loud, the guy is cloaked.
Kamal Aamma	Posted - 2006.12.04 10:36:00 - [56] Change local chat to for example constellation chat. Then you could chat with even MORE people nearby you, but take away the exploitable benefits of this silly system-chat. And the best thing is, it's alredy implemented in the game so no great changes would have to be made. Nowdays constellation and regional chats are always empty, no matter where you fly. :(
Chian XinLian	Posted - 2006.12.04 11:17:00 - [57] Still people seem to fail to see the POINT. If you remove local (or as one poster suggested - hide cloaking ships from local) it only benefits pirates. Unless there are some more drastic changes to several key systems in game. Sure I'd loved myself too that I'd be able to fly out there and be 'invisible' for others, unless they get lucky and spot me in some scan or probe of theirs. But with current game mechanics - only hunter would benefit (A LOT) by removal of local. It would be big shaft (or slap to a face) to anyone not hunting for a player. As also stated - anyone in 0.0 not hunting player, is most likely ravishing asteroid or giving a hell to npc rats and thus is easy to find. Bigger systems it's bit longer if you have to hop from belt to belt. But you dont - you have scanner. And due map - you know there's someone (even if you wouldnt have local)
Luka Terrlo	Posted - 2006.12.04 11:38:00 - [58] Removing local would be frickin insane. It's the first stage of the primary defenses that alliances use to control their borders. No intel - or even late intel - equals zero defense. You're gonna get walked all over if you don't know what's heading your way. It takes time to build a resistance force out of people scattered all over the region. And you can't expect people to camp all gates in a 50 jump radius to see who's coming through.
Marco P	Posted - 2006.12.04 11:55:00 - [59] I dont believe in random abuse on the forums but - anyone who wants to remove local is either an idiot or an out and out pirate. The removal of local would finish 99% of mining and ratting in 0.0 Forget scanning, pirates just jump into a system, one in a cov ops checks the belts and they all kill the juiciest targets they can find. Then they would be nearly impossible to find - you dont even know which system they are in and you cant split your defensive blob cos then youll get jumped. Quite possibly the stupidest, least thought out suggestion that I've ever read on these forums and thats saying something!
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:43:00 - [60] It's simple: the map only updates every 30 minutes. Hunters - mobile - never appear on it. Prey do. Secondly, prey have to be in an asteroid belt. They will be no where else because asteroid belts are not big enough. Ships easily out range the distance of belts. So all the hunters have to do is fly from belt to belt to find them and target the barges or escort at range. There will be no way to practically secure an alliances space and be able to say - "mine here, we'll tell you if anyone comes" without watching the gates continuously. Which no one wants to do, because IT IS NOT FUN.
Ishquar Teh'Sainte Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:46:00 - [61] Edited by: Ishquar Teh''Sainte on 04/12/2006 12:47:17 Quote: Secondly, prey have to be in an asteroid belt. They will be no where else because asteroid belts are not big enough. well .. "hidden" belts (aka off-grid belts allow you to mine far far away from the warp in point in the belt. the hunter needs to use the scanner and mwd to find you - should give you ample time to leave before he has found you. oh wait - CCP nerfed the asteroids on the scanner ___________________ EVE: Revelations - The Game for Carebears and Gankbears no more skill needed for PvP - only skillpoints for Large Bubble and CovOps n00b-alts
d026 Herrscher der Zeit	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:49:00 - [62] local is fine as it is:)
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:49:00 - [63] Originally by: James Duar It's simple: the map only updates every 30 minutes. Hunters - mobile - never appear on it. Prey do. Secondly, prey have to be in an asteroid belt. They will be no where else because asteroid belts are not big enough. Ships easily out range the distance of belts. So all the hunters have to do is fly from belt to belt to find them and target the barges or escort at range. There will be no way to practically secure an alliances space and be able to say - "mine here, we'll tell you if anyone comes" without watching the gates continuously. Which no one wants to do, because IT IS NOT FUN. So don't stay at the same spot for 30 minutes if you aren't prepared to protect yourself? Actually, if you aren't prepared to protect yourself at all, you should be on the move and constantly aware. Being careless is a luxury that you afford through resources like friends and guards, not the goddamn chat device. There will also be no way to hunt people like you do now by jumping into a system and checking local for targets. You think every hunting group is going to stop at every system and check every belt? If they do; a lot of people can mine happily while they're busy wasting time. If they don't; find a system with a lot of space, and mine there safely. The door swings both ways sugarplum!
MECTO Xenobytes Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:53:00 - [64] local is pretty stupid thing It's Great Being Carebear in Kali - aint it? Originally by: Tuxford In this picture you might think that Gallente totally pwn. Well they're alright
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 12:59:00 - [65] Remove it. The new player SP boost was to make new players more useful to alliances. With no local you'll need scouts. This gives new players and people who like the faster smaller ships something to do. It will also bring back guerilla warfare and stop the blobbing in single systems. Sneak a few pilots through and build raiding fleets behind lines. Alliances will have to work at patrolling their space. It give those 2000 members something to do. Better than blobbing a choke point. People moan about fleet lag and blobs. Here is an oppurtunity to remove the reason for blobbing and disperse the EVE population. Want people in low sec, remove local. I could see a reason for keeping when scanning was palyer based. But the improvements now allow it to be removed. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:03:00 - [66] Edited by: James Duar on 04/12/2006 13:06:17 Edited by: James Duar on 04/12/2006 13:03:58 Originally by: Semper Sanguis Originally by: James Duar It's simple: the map only updates every 30 minutes. Hunters - mobile - never appear on it. Prey do. Secondly, prey have to be in an asteroid belt. They will be no where else because asteroid belts are not big enough. Ships easily out range the distance of belts. So all the hunters have to do is fly from belt to belt to find them and target the barges or escort at range. There will be no way to practically secure an alliances space and be able to say - "mine here, we'll tell you if anyone comes" without watching the gates continuously. Which no one wants to do, because IT IS NOT FUN. So don't stay at the same spot for 30 minutes if you aren't prepared to protect yourself? Actually, if you aren't prepared to protect yourself at all, you should be on the move and constantly aware. Being careless is a luxury that you afford through resources like friends and guards, not the goddamn chat device. There will also be no way to hunt people like you do now by jumping into a system and checking local for targets. You think every hunting group is going to stop at every system and check every belt? If they do; a lot of people can mine happily while they're busy wasting time. If they don't; find a system with a lot of space, and mine there safely. The door swings both ways sugarplum! So what do you do in EVE anyway? Have you ever guarded a mining op? Would you want to? Mining ops are guarded now. Without local no one will have even the faintest chance of getting away due to the time it takes barges to warp. And you still haven't answered the problem of securing alliance territory at all. EDIT: And all that aside, you still haven't answered why if removing Local is so fair to everyone, it should be done in the first place with absolutely no other changes to the gameplay. EDIT 2: Also, you might want to look earlier in the thread to see my point about removing local which would be an improvement on the game before you go off on a tangent about me being opposed to change.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:12:00 - [67] Quote: So what do you do in EVE anyway? Have you ever guarded a mining op? Would you want to? Mining ops are guarded now. Without local no one will have even the faintest chance of getting away due to the time it takes barges to warp. Yes I've guarded mining ops, and our barges haven't died because we guard them. Anything else? Quote: And you still haven't answered the problem of securing alliance territory at all. Simple answer: If you want to fully secure you alliance space, you should only claim as much as you are capable of securing. If you want recon, you should have scouts. Because you know, thats how intelligence is gathered if you don't have an omniscient chat device; scouts and recon. Quote: EDIT: And all that aside, you still haven't answered why if removing Local is so fair to everyone, it should be done in the first place with absolutely no other changes to the gameplay. I don't understand this question. Please rephrase it. Quote: EDIT 2: Also, you might want to look earlier in the thread to see my point about removing local which would be an improvement on the game before you go off on a tangent about me being opposed to change. If you link it, I might read it. No promises.
Thundercat Doom Minmatar Melissa Jumpclones INC	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:15:00 - [68] Edited by: Thundercat Doom on 04/12/2006 13:19:23 Removing local would give anyone who wants to camp out a station in low security the advantage. I understand there is a timer on people who are docking and undocking, but if you are in a fat ship that labors into warp drive, you are a dead duck. Or you could have someone there bumping the person exiting until the timer is up, then ya blast them. You of course cannot scan from inside a station, so it would give any would be station camper a huge advantage. At least with local, you know that there could be someone outside waiting for you. I don't think local should be removed any where, but of course, that is just my opinion. -------------------- -------------------- Flamers are Lamers.
SamuelAdams Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:16:00 - [69] I like the new local, keep it.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:19:00 - [70] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: So what do you do in EVE anyway? Have you ever guarded a mining op? Would you want to? Mining ops are guarded now. Without local no one will have even the faintest chance of getting away due to the time it takes barges to warp. Yes I've guarded mining ops, and our barges haven't died because we guard them. Anything else? Really? So the fact your barges were already powering up for warp had nothing to do with it? Because I've plenty of mining ops happen where despite this a barge goes down anyway because there armor is paper. There is no practical way to 'shield' a weak ship in EVE if someone just zooms in for the kill - or snipes. Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: And you still haven't answered the problem of securing alliance territory at all. Simple answer: If you want to fully secure you alliance space, you should only claim as much as you are capable of securing. If you want recon, you should have scouts. Because you know, thats how intelligence is gathered if you don't have an omniscient chat device; scouts and recon. No one wants to sit on a gate and watch for people who jump in. That is boring. That is not what people play EVE for. And on a practical level, if that had to happen then we would quickly build automated sentries that did it for us and yelled when they got attacked. And put them everywhere at 300km from the gates. Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: EDIT: And all that aside, you still haven't answered why if removing Local is so fair to everyone, it should be done in the first place with absolutely no other changes to the gameplay. I don't understand this question. Please rephrase it. Simple: why do you want Local removed? There have been numerous disadvantages to fun for 90% of the game pointed out. The only people who benefit are low sec pirates if Local simply disappeared tomorrow. So how come you want it, if you are not a low sec pirate? Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: EDIT 2: Also, you might want to look earlier in the thread to see my point about removing local which would be an improvement on the game before you go off on a tangent about me being opposed to change. If you link it, I might read it. No promises. Linkage Enjoy. In fact you should probably read that first and tell me why we shouldn't do that.
Maestro Ulv Phaze-9	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:33:00 - [71] Lets not remove local and let those that like it keep it just as it is. Wow radical view! I'm not bored, I'm merely in the Queue.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:34:00 - [72] Quote: Really? So the fact your barges were already powering up for warp had nothing to do with it? Because I've plenty of mining ops happen where despite this a barge goes down anyway because there armor is paper. There is no practical way to 'shield' a weak ship in EVE if someone just zooms in for the kill - or snipes. I guess you just don't know how to protect a mining op then, since in my experience, it's very much doable. Quote: No one wants to sit on a gate and watch for people who jump in. That is boring. That is not what people play EVE for. And on a practical level, if that had to happen then we would quickly build automated sentries that did it for us and yelled when they got attacked. And put them everywhere at 300km from the gates. Then don't do it? You don't have to keep eyes on gates 24/7 if you don't want to. You'll notice when a fleet rams into your space eventually. The only difference is, those who have eyes around will know sooner and can prepare better, hence the importance of "boring" intelligence activity. And you can't really claim to know what "people play EVE for" so cut down on the elected-representative talk. Quote: Simple: why do you want Local removed? There have been numerous disadvantages to fun for 90% of the game pointed out. The only people who benefit are low sec pirates if Local simply disappeared tomorrow. So how come you want it, if you are not a low sec pirate? Every single statement above is your silly opinion. I see no numerous disadvantages, and I have already explained why. I don't see 90% of the game anywhere, and you're certainly not qualified to make that kind of a numerical statement. So what am I to answer to exactly? Nothing substantial obviously. And is it so hard to imagine a person who doesn't act out of SELFISHNESS but rather the desire to have a game that is more immersive and strategy oriented rather than ADHD-compatible and safety-padded for the comfort of the lazy?
SSgt Sniper Gallente In Excess Enterprises	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:35:00 - [73] Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 04/12/2006 13:39:45 Originally by: Extinctor Fortis I agree, local should not be a tactical tool, and optional for the user to broadcast themselves.. No one really uses it for chat in low sec systems anyways. Corporations have corpchat, alliances have alliance chat, and allied alliances have joint channels - assuming they aren't all using Teamspeak in the first place. I think it would create more immersion, and excitement. EVE is just so boring when you don't have to work for information. It puts everyone on the same playing field, when clearly, not everyone is of the same skill. And without losers, there are no winners. I use it to talk in lowsec. Yes, let's be all about the hardcore, shove the recreational and casual gamers even FURTHER out of the game, so ccp can go broke. I swear I'm getting sick to death of the hardcore crowd thinking they have the right to assess what's 'fair' for everyone. I don't use teamspeak btw, and never will. (I actually can't it conflicts with some progrms I use for work) It would completely ruin my immersion, as I can't sidle up to the belt and chat it up, nor can I watch an interesting convo that was already going on. My enjoyment factor would definitely go down. And putting everyone on the same playing field (which local does by snitching on you) should be something you like, so that your ability shines through. The OP reads like someone who had a lot of folks run away from systems he's visited recently. Kinda tells you a lot about who he is to be honest, he is the type interested in ruining someone else's day just so he can say he did it. --------- Gallente need ONE ship with an ecm bonus option. JUST ONE.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:37:00 - [74] Quote: Linkage Nice idea! Definately better than the omniscient pilot list that is local, but probably not completely balanced since it's obvious you wrote it in a hissy fit in order to make a point. But in general, I don't think it's outrageous or unacceptable at all.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:38:00 - [75] Quote: The OP reads like someone who had a lot of folks run away from systems he's visited recently. Kinda tells you a lot about who he is to be honest, he is the type interested in ruining someone else's day just so he can say he did it. You forgot "He probably tortured and killed animals when he was a child". I am disappointed. The quality of the pseudo-shrinks on these boards is going down.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:41:00 - [76] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: Linkage Nice idea! Definately better than the omniscient pilot list that is local, but probably not completely balanced since it's obvious you wrote it in a hissy fit in order to make a point. But in general, I don't think it's outrageous or unacceptable at all. It's not really meant to be outrageous, it's meant to put the "remove local!" calls in context. I support them, provided a lot more is done to many other systems. Obviously there would be ways it would make pirating dumb players easier too, but I am certainly making some assumptions about the mentality of the typical caller for the removal of local. A proper sensor/electronic warfare system in EVE would indeed be quite awesome, and if we got it I'd be happy for local to be removed since being jumped by a pirate in a belt would certainly mean I should've seen him coming or he's just really clever.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:43:00 - [77] Quote: ...but I am certainly making some assumptions about the mentality of the typical caller for the removal of local. Quote: Certainly your assumptions are wrong then, since I find your idea to be feasible. No?
SSgt Sniper Gallente In Excess Enterprises	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:44:00 - [78] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: The OP reads like someone who had a lot of folks run away from systems he's visited recently. Kinda tells you a lot about who he is to be honest, he is the type interested in ruining someone else's day just so he can say he did it. You forgot "He probably tortured and killed animals when he was a child". I am disappointed. The quality of the pseudo-shrinks on these boards is going down. I'm not a pseudo shrink by any means. The only folks that want local to go away are folks being hurt by it. Pirates, and invaders pretty much. What do raiders and pirates do? they blow up other people, whether these folks wanted to be engaged or were willing to fight in the first place. What happens to folks who lost their ships trying to mind their own business? They get upset. So, by being a pirate your whole point of existance is to make others miserable! Bleeding simple, and bleeding obvious. Go point your epeen someplace else. --------- Gallente need ONE ship with an ecm bonus option. JUST ONE.
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:45:00 - [79] Man people are short sighted. Remove local and far fewer people would be in lowsec/0.0 and many would leave the game altogether. When realism > Fun for the majority of the players people start leaving. Just a simple fact. I'm kind of on the fence about how I feel about local. I both like and dislike it. But if you pull it you are going to do a lot more than just allow people to hide. You're going to encourage people... a lot of them... to leave lowsec/0.0 (and possibly the game altogether). Which is probably why posts like these tend to be ignored by the Devs.
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:46:00 - [80] Edited by: Semper Sanguis on 04/12/2006 13:46:20 Quote: I'm not a pseudo shrink by any means. The only folks that want local to go away are folks being hurt by it. Pirates, and invaders pretty much. What do raiders and pirates do? they blow up other people, whether these folks wanted to be engaged or were willing to fight in the first place. What happens to folks who lost their ships trying to mind their own business? They get upset. So, by being a pirate your whole point of existance is to make others miserable! Bleeding simple, and bleeding obvious. Go point your epeen someplace else. Well slap me silly, this must be what they meant when they said Revelations! ...not.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:46:00 - [81] Edited by: James Duar on 04/12/2006 13:48:58 Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: ...but I am certainly making some assumptions about the mentality of the typical caller for the removal of local. Certainly your assumptions are wrong then, since I find your idea to be feasible. No? Never assumed you were a pirate. My question above was more "I don't think you've really considered this question properly" - but I guess we can agree to disagree on that point. The assumptions are in the way I present it. I wouldn't be quite so condescending were I just throwing it out there. EDIT: Also Sgt. Sniper I think you're really being too hard on pirates. I don't like them because they blow up my stuff. But I enjoy the fact they exist in the game. What's life without challenges?
Nev Clavain Wise Guys Rogue Method Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:50:00 - [82] Edited by: Nev Clavain on 04/12/2006 13:51:26 Originally by: Semper Sanguis As I said, local is hardly the only way to chat. There are plenty of channels for specific purposes, for specific groups etc. And again, you can declare yourself in local just like you did before. Removing local does nothing but add to immersion and strategy. LOL are you one of these people who never open your mouth except for a specific purpose? When within 3 posts of this thread starting you used the words "ADHD mentality" to describe someone who disagrees with you, I lost all respect for anything you had to say on the issue. If you think this is a game for people with ADHD, you clearly misunderstand the term. The fact that you bandy it about trying to belittle Maya, and the fact that you can't seem to empathise at all with the fact that some people just like to 'chat' for no other reason than just to communicate, leads me to believe that if anyone around here has issues, it is you. Maya was saying that local chat is part of the fun of the game. Of course it is used as a tactical tool, because it is useful as such, but it is also used for its intended purpose, which is to chat, often at random with complete strangers. Obviously this doesnt suit your particular style of play, so you want it abolished. However you support this with the arbitrary assumption that because it is called 'local chat' it should have no use as a tactical tool. Why not? Within the mechanics and story of the game, everyone jumps into a system through jumpgates, which record the entry and exit of ships and their pilots from a system. Faster tha light travel and instant communications are also not a problem within the game mechanics. Put the two together and you have local chat. It is not implausable in the slightest, yet in your mind you have made it so, simply because you do not want it in game because you see it as an obstacle. I honestly think you are taking this Game a little too seriously, when you wish something as extreme as the removal of local chat, which is a fun feature for the majority of players who pay their subs too, simply to make recon and blobbing people more viable. Its not hard to get kills in this game as it is already, and its also not hard to escape being killed if you are smart. Removal of local chat will not change this because people will adapt. All removal of local chat will do is remove community and fun for alot of people to whom EVE isnt a religion, its just something they play for fun.
SSgt Sniper Gallente In Excess Enterprises	Posted - 2006.12.04 13:54:00 - [83] Originally by: Taram Caldar Man people are short sighted. Remove local and far fewer people would be in lowsec/0.0 and many would leave the game altogether. When realism > Fun for the majority of the players people start leaving. Just a simple fact. I'm kind of on the fence about how I feel about local. I both like and dislike it. But if you pull it you are going to do a lot more than just allow people to hide. You're going to encourage people... a lot of them... to leave lowsec/0.0 (and possibly the game altogether). Which is probably why posts like these tend to be ignored by the Devs. Exactly. And ccp would shut down, and their would be no tranquility for him to leagally make people suffer. So why would he want what would in the end kill his own fun? --------- Gallente need ONE ship with an ecm bonus option. JUST ONE.
Yumi Katanawe Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:00:00 - [84] Actually probes can be considered "active" since they show up on the scanner thus they show that someone's out there looking for you. I'm quite sure the devs have something thought out - you can see down the line how a strengthened scan system could eventually replace local.
SSgt Sniper Gallente In Excess Enterprises	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:02:00 - [85] Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 04/12/2006 14:11:55 Originally by: James Duar Edited by: James Duar on 04/12/2006 13:48:58 Originally by: Semper Sanguis Quote: ...but I am certainly making some assumptions about the mentality of the typical caller for the removal of local. Certainly your assumptions are wrong then, since I find your idea to be feasible. No? Never assumed you were a pirate. My question above was more "I don't think you've really considered this question properly" - but I guess we can agree to disagree on that point. The assumptions are in the way I present it. I wouldn't be quite so condescending were I just throwing it out there. EDIT: Also Sgt. Sniper I think you're really being too hard on pirates. I don't like them because they blow up my stuff. But I enjoy the fact they exist in the game. What's life without challenges? James, I am a very simple to the point guy. And I believe you should treat other folks with a respectful nature when at all possible, and treat those the way you wish to be treated. Which cuts both ways: by apirate blatantly disrespecting other people, he has lost any right to respectful treatment from me. That's just the way I see it and likely I will never change. If you want to go fight in some huge corp tussel, fine. Pony up the iskies for a legal dec and away you go! But pirates, don't qualify. EDIT to add that Mercs don't qualify as pirates and do get respect. They are not hunting folks for the fun of making folks not asking for trouble suffer, they are hunting because someone PAID them to do it. And a lot of them dec it just like normal, which means the 'victim' had full awareness they were coming. --------- Gallente need ONE ship with an ecm bonus option. JUST ONE.
Edgars Sults LFC Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:03:00 - [86] They won't remove local so stop asking for it!
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:09:00 - [87] Originally by: Edgars Sults They won't remove local so stop asking for it! Oveur put a post up a few years ago as they were thinking about it. No one really knows what will really happen. Opinion was split across all communities and professions. They decided not to remove it but didn't discount considering it in the future. Its like any otehr big change people always threatens to leave. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:12:00 - [88] Originally by: SSgt Sniper I'm not a pseudo shrink by any means. The only folks that want local to go away are folks being hurt by it. Pirates, and invaders pretty much. What do raiders and pirates do? they blow up other people, whether these folks wanted to be engaged or were willing to fight in the first place. What happens to folks who lost their ships trying to mind their own business? They get upset. So, by being a pirate your whole point of existance is to make others miserable! Bleeding simple, and bleeding obvious. Go point your epeen someplace else. Exactly. I couldn't have said it better, although I don't agree with the making people miserable part. I'm a complete **** in real-life but like to play a nice-guy in game just to get away from all that . Another point people are missing is that there is a fundemantal asymmetry between hunters and hunted in Eve: the hunted are usually more or less stationary and their favourite spots are pretty well known or easy enough to discover. For this reason, you have as Maya has said many times before, to use either local or the scanner. If you think insta-lag was bad just wait until 10,000 carebears start spamming their scanners every 5 seconds. The problem here is that "pirates" are whining for the wammmmbulances after WTZ. I say damned right. They need to work for their kills.
Sentinel Eeex Caldari Two Brothers Mining Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:19:00 - [89] Originally by: Extinctor Fortis I am very suprised someone from the biggest 0.0 entity ingame would be abhorrently opposed to what is essentially more content for them. Please, stop with this silly suggestions about LOCAL. It'd affect 0.0 space more than anything else (and 99% of people suggesting these changes seemingly know ****all about living in 0.0), and I'm tired of silly little piwates whining about LOCAL all the time. Go and find someone to fight, if you want to pew-pew so much, it's really easy...
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:47:00 - [90] Originally by: Sentinel Eeex Please, stop with this silly suggestions about LOCAL. It'd affect 0.0 space more than anything else (and 99% of people suggesting these changes seemingly know ****all about living in 0.0), and I'm tired of silly little piwates whining about LOCAL all the time. Go and find someone to fight, if you want to pew-pew so much, it's really easy... Indeed, pierats n00bs cannot kill people because they suck, so they want everyone nerfed so they can get a kill We all know that the remove local threads come from the fevered imagination of people with too much time on their hands while sitting at a gate camp trying to kill other n00b's.. you talk it up as much as you can, but flying through empty space and not even seeing someone else in local would make this game the most boring space sim ever, it would no longer be a MMO, it would be a online single or two player game <nelson>ha, ha</nelson>
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:48:00 - [91] Originally by: Sentinel Eeex Originally by: Extinctor Fortis I am very suprised someone from the biggest 0.0 entity ingame would be abhorrently opposed to what is essentially more content for them. Please, stop with this silly suggestions about LOCAL. It'd affect 0.0 space more than anything else (and 99% of people suggesting these changes seemingly know ****all about living in 0.0), and I'm tired of silly little piwates whining about LOCAL all the time. Go and find someone to fight, if you want to pew-pew so much, it's really easy... The people who want it removed aren't all pirates. A lot of us know exactly what its like in 0.0. Alliances have it far too easy. POS spam and permanent choke point camps basically cut off large tracts of content for a select minority of the player base. I've been a defender, an attacker and an infiltrator. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 14:59:00 - [92] Originally by: Fracking Beach Nice ideas on this thread. Few toughts: Why not make an ON/OFF switch for "Local Communications Channel". This way if one wished to chat, be visible and participate in local chat, they switch a knob. This would make it possible to be either visible or invisible in local. Since probing is so easy now, having a active scan/probe warning would make sense. That's a good idea. But, I think passive scanning should also be possible, given it doesn't "locate" anything. If someone starts actively probing for location, it should activate a warning in other ships in system. The warning could also be an option (or on/off) type setting. I suggested both the scan warning and a passive scan probe (low scan range, obvious use at the gate) on the first page of this thread. I believe those two would be enough to mitigate the removal of the Local's recon function. The only problem I see with the scan warning is the lag it may caouse in a populated system with multiple scan probes being used. ...
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:04:00 - [93] Originally by: Razin The only problem I see with the scan warning is the lag it may caouse in a populated system with multiple scan probes being used. Quite right Holmes. I suggest that in order to reduce lag, a single probe be permanently installed in every system that every player can "tap into". We can call this probe: Local.
Lisento Slaven Amarr The Drekla Consortium Kurai Komichi	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:16:00 - [94] If local was removed we'd need a way to detect incoming ships into the system. For this I look back to a game I once played (and think I might reinstall soon when I get a joystick): Allegiance! Allegiance works the exact same was as EVE now that I think about it, but instead of stargates they have wormholes. You approach wormhole and enter it to go into next system. Except in allegiance it was a multiplayer flight sim/strat and you couldn't see stuff unless one of the people on your team saw it. But there was a little fun thing that you could deploy. Scan probes in Allegiance you could drop pretty much anywhere and they would have a certain effective range. They were easily poppable. In Allegiance you had to constantly be replacing scan probes and destroying the enemies probes - this way no one could detect or so you could detect, fleets of battleships/destroyers/bombers coming. If they seeded "probes" of some sort (something easy to launch that decays over time, maybe an hour, and doesn't bug out when you dock) into EVE maybe it would lead the way to removing local as an insta-info gatherer with no work and uber saftey. If local is removed there has to be a way to setup an intelligence network that doesn't involve forcing a player to sit for hours in front of a stargate. Something automated that would inform a player (or that players gang/fleet) or maybe a computer that people can link with. Or maybe....... There's an idea - have a new outpost upgrade for an intelligence network. Each probe dropped can be linked with that outpost (as long as its within range of course). Players can link up with that outpost to get information from the network. But uh-oh...they go outside the network they're going to be screwed unless they have something else to link up with (or maybe a private network of their own?). Probe can be popped of course. Maybe have it harder to scan for if you're looking to pop an alliances/corps intelligence network. It's a workable idea no? =\ --- Lisento Slaven wants to be a Space Whaler in EVE. Put in space whales!
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:16:00 - [95] Originally by: BurnHard Originally by: Razin The only problem I see with the scan warning is the lag it may caouse in a populated system with multiple scan probes being used. Quite right Holmes. I suggest that in order to reduce lag, a single probe be permanently installed in every system that every player can "tap into". We can call this probe: Local. Everyone in the system sees the cynosural field as it's generated. No? The scan warning can work in the same manner. And thanks for pointing out the extreme usefulness of Local again. I think it wasn't obvious enough before. ...
Epidemis	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:21:00 - [96] Removing local will give a HUGE advantage to hunters since they can use the map setting potentially to find targets, while the targeted wouldn't have a clue.
Gudrun Hart	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:24:00 - [97] Edited by: Gudrun Hart on 04/12/2006 15:24:47 This is the first time that local has a usefull GUI - with the indicators. Its was a pain to check all the pilots in local when your at war... If you, as a pirate or pilor at war, dont have any clue how to deal with the situation, then you should change your Job to - science or trading.
Mesacc Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:27:00 - [98] I support changing local to where you only show if you talk, or in sci-fi terms,"open a channel". As big as solarsystems are, its kinda lame that you magicly know when someone jumps in or when jumping in you know imediatly if someone is in the system. Finding out if anyone is there should require scanners or probes or good old fashion looking!
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:27:00 - [99] Originally by: Epidemis Removing local will give a HUGE advantage to hunters since they can use the map setting potentially to find targets, while the targeted wouldn't have a clue. I can't see a reason for the leaving the map in and removing local. Removing local may require other mechanisms to be introduced. I believe it would reduce the size of territories held by alliances if they had to go to more effort to defend it. People are in empire because the requirements for joining the existing alliances is prohibitive. More alliances more people not in empire, more scope and choice. More small scale wars instead of the stupid blob wars. LOL one corp had a requirement to play 3 hrs per day. I'm currently putting together 'life pack' for some people. It contains instructions on how to get a job and a girlfriend as well as GPS co-ordinates to the local pub. I'm also thinking of setting up a agency so you can rent a friend for a week to go to the pub with you. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Lisa Lightyear	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:30:00 - [100] "Dear CCP, please let us mine invisibly in 0.0 and alliance held territory so we can farm it up and get fat on the profits with zero risk to our ships/assets/equipment without anyone ever knowing we were there or paying any rent to the alliance or corporation that fought hard for the territory to begin with and with absolutely no risk of being engaged by hostile forces because lol they can't see us unless we want them too" Signed, The Carebears.
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:49:00 - [101] Originally by: Lisa Lightyear Edited by: Lisa Lightyear on 04/12/2006 15:37:59 "Dear CCP, please let us mine invisibly in 0.0 and alliance held territory so we can farm it up and get fat on the profits with zero risk to our ships/assets/equipment without anyone ever knowing we were there or paying any rent to the alliance or corporation that fought hard for the territory to begin with and with absolutely no risk of being engaged by hostile forces because lol they can't see us unless we want them too" Signed, The Carebears. You didn't think your thesis through properly: miners aren't "invisible" without local, they are very visible, because their favoured locations are well known. On the other hand, to all intents and purposes the Killers are invisible.
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:51:00 - [102] Originally by: Lisa Lightyear Edited by: Lisa Lightyear on 04/12/2006 15:37:59 "Dear CCP, please let us mine invisibly in 0.0 and alliance held territory so we can farm it up and get fat on the profits with zero risk to our ships/assets/equipment without anyone ever knowing we were there or paying any rent to the alliance or corporation that fought hard for the territory to begin with and with absolutely no risk of being engaged by hostile forces because lol they can't see us unless we want them too" Signed, The Carebears. Give it a rest the biggest carebears are the alliance miners. I've had miners moan that they were missing valuable mining because I couldn't catch the 4 Caracals bombing around our space. Eventually I got some help and we toasted them but they just sat in station whining. Call to arms goes out they all bolt to station or log off while the PvPers blob the chokepoints. If the incoming blob is bigger you go sit at the POS 'SPAM1001' and wait to lag out the incoming fleet. How would it be 0 risk. It's your space you have numbers, logistics and they can't see you coming. They still have to get their ill gotten gains out. As opposed to semi-afk camping you would have to run patrols. Surely thats more interesting for all concerned. Which I wouldn't imagine it would bother alliance PvPers lets face it thats what they like doing a change to blob warfare would problem be welcomed. Its only the alliance miners that won't like it because they may get caught out. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:54:00 - [103] Originally by: Valan Give it a rest the biggest carebears are the alliance miners. I've had miners moan that they were missing valuable mining because I couldn't catch the 4 Caracals bombing around our space. Eventually I got some help and we toasted them but they just sat in station whining. Call to arms goes out they all bolt to station or log off while the PvPers blob the chokepoints. If the incoming blob is bigger you go sit at the POS 'SPAM1001' and wait to lag out the incoming fleet. How would it be 0 risk. It's your space you have numbers, logistics and they can't see you coming. They still have to get their ill gotten gains out. This would work and would be a great addition IF resources were distributed around 0.0 more evenly. As it is, you can tell pretty much whether a system is going to be miner-rich by checking it's true SS.
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 15:58:00 - [104] Very true you can also pretty much tell historically if know the area well. So there would have to be some tweaking involved. Its the principle I'm advocating the exact implementation as always is full of pitfalls. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 16:33:00 - [105] Quote: You didn't think your thesis through properly: miners aren't "invisible" without local, they are very visible, because their favoured locations are well known. On the other hand, to all intents and purposes the Killers are invisible. This makes no sense. If their favoured locations are well known, shouldn't they know well that people are going to look for them there? And where are these favoured locations anyway? There are five thousand systems in EVE, each with at least one belt. Add to this complexes, and the favourable locations make up a huge area; hardly an advantage to anyone. An even if you consider it an advantage, thats like saying the ambushers have the advantage in an ambush, even if the ambushees are well aware that there will be an ambush, which in principle, doesn't even make it an ambush. Thesis lol.
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 16:46:00 - [106] Originally by: Semper Sanguis And where are these favoured locations anyway? There are five thousand systems in EVE, each with at least one belt. Add to this complexes, and the favourable locations make up a huge area; hardly an advantage to anyone. You pretty much know 10/10 complexes are going to be camped 23/7 by someone, so you can throw those out for starters. Then there are vaste swathes of 0.0 that only contain crap ores. The decent stuff may be found in only a few and there are usually player outposts in or near those systems, so that narrows it down even further. I can't remember the last time I saw a player mining a crap belt in 0.0 to be honest. Originally by: Semper Sanguis An even if you consider it an advantage, thats like saying the ambushers have the advantage in an ambush, even if the ambushees are well aware that there will be an ambush, which in principle, doesn't even make it an ambush. I understand what you are trying to say, but try and compute how the average reasonable person will respond to the removal of local. Firstly, yes, ride with a gang to protect mining ops. But how large should that gang be? You have no idea what size of gang is going to attack you, if it's a lone player or a large group of 50+. It would be impossible to organise regular "blob mining sessions" because people would just get bored to tears with the whole thing and the amount of "resource" (consider lost earnings of the protecting gang) required would be huge. With low sec things are even worse. Nobody wants to sit all night and protect a Jaspet mining session, so you can throw out all the independants/freelancers who like to arse around out there as well (lets face it, the reward isn't worth the greatly increased risk), which to be honest is the majority of them. The ambushers have an advantage in that they can scout (covert ops) to work out who/how large/where. The ambushees have to ride the worst case scenario - a huge disadvantage I think.
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:00:00 - [107] You've kinda added why local should be removed. Although I understand sentry duty is boring. They have no risk at the moment. Local lights up, bolt! How is that helping the game. All you need is a couple of scouts. it would eat into profits but the alternative is no risk max profit. Redistirbution of resouces would have to be changed to get rid of the obvious hot spots. It would be nice for me. For some reason even when I'm on my own in 0.0 in local people seem reluctant to have a go unless there are a few of them. /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Semper Sanguis	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:04:00 - [108] Quote: I understand what you are trying to say, but try and compute how the average reasonable person will respond to the removal of local. Firstly, yes, ride with a gang to protect mining ops. But how large should that gang be? You have no idea what size of gang is going to attack you, if it's a lone player or a large group of 50+. It would be impossible to organise regular "blob mining sessions" because people would just get bored to tears with the whole thing and the amount of "resource" (consider lost earnings of the protecting gang) required would be huge. With low sec things are even worse. Nobody wants to sit all night and protect a Jaspet mining session, so you can throw out all the independants/freelancers who like to arse around out there as well (lets face it, the reward isn't worth the greatly increased risk), which to be honest is the majority of them. I'd imagine a single guard on look-out duty would suffice to get early warning on any hostiles, much like local does right now, except that players do it instead. And if we're talking about players mining, it won't mean lower earnings, just higher charges across the board since everyone is effected equally. i.e, having a watch/guard around without local is much more valuable than having one around with local, since local makes the watch/guard pretty much redundant. Frankly, this would be a great opportunity of new pilots who can't mine as hard or fight as hard to find work in 0.0 as "spotters". Local simply spoils any prospect of such occupations by giving everyone perfect intelligence for nothing in return. Quote: You pretty much know 10/10 complexes are going to be camped 23/7 by someone, so you can throw those out for starters. Then there are vaste swathes of 0.0 that only contain crap ores. The decent stuff may be found in only a few and there are usually player outposts in or near those systems, so that narrows it down even further. I can't remember the last time I saw a player mining a crap belt in 0.0 to be honest. Well we'll have to disagree then, because I believe those crap belts were put there for people who do not have the strength/smarts/friends or any other resource to mine or npc anywhere else. When such people attempt to move up the ladder of return without covering their asses on the ladder of risk, people die and crying ensues. Quote: The ambushers have an advantage in that they can scout (covert ops) to work out who/how large/where. The ambushees have to ride the worst case scenario - a huge disadvantage I think. True, under the condition that the ambushers know where to look. I'd probably have to suggest a further nerfing of the map averages so that miners and such are less visible, but mainly, without local, a hunting party HAS to scan every system for targets and cannot go around indexing prey according to local numbers. I honestly think that even after narrowing down the possible favorable areas, the factor of visibility is hugely diminished, especially for smaller groups.
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Distant Star Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:14:00 - [109] Originally by: Sentinel Eeex Originally by: Extinctor Fortis I am very suprised someone from the biggest 0.0 entity ingame would be abhorrently opposed to what is essentially more content for them. Please, stop with this silly suggestions about LOCAL. It'd affect 0.0 space more than anything else (and 99% of people suggesting these changes seemingly know ****all about living in 0.0), and I'm tired of silly little piwates whining about LOCAL all the time. Go and find someone to fight, if you want to pew-pew so much, it's really easy... The only sensible sentiment in the entire thread, albeit professed by multiple persons. :p
Valan	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:21:00 - [110] There is no difference between a pirate and an alliance. I know I've been in them. You shoot everyone not on your side. You raid other alliances shooting haulers and miners. The only difference is the pretense you put on it as an alliance :) /start sig I love old characters that post 'I've beeen playing the game three years' when I know their account has been sold on. /end sig
Kryss Darkdust	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:28:00 - [111] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/12/2006 00:33:32 Yes, it has everything to do with that, because anyone stupid enough to chat would be kicked from any corp with a clue. And that's one of many points. Here's another: Risk/rewards allready makes 0.0 marginally viable for many players, the removal of local will lead to many leaving, and others sitting newb alts in shuttles at the gates, and logging whenever an enemy turns up. So you'll never ever see their miners. "As it should be" IF you want to kill any semblence of "game" in Eve, yes. As it should be to travel for hours without any feel of being arround anyone else, of spending an evening fruitnessly hunting for people who left hours ago, getting invisible lagspikes from fleets you can't detect killing you...etc. I prefer Eve to be FUN, thanks! If local stops you killing people, that's your personal skill issues. NOT the game's fault. Not that I'm against removing local, as I agree with you that it is primarily used as an intelegence tool and not a "chat tool" as its often sold, it is however in fact a chat tool. I think you really have to have a easy way to communicate with people around you because although you may think that its stupid to chat with someone in local from a PvP perspective, most people don't. As a chat tool local is used very often and its a rare case in which two people engage each other and don't speak before, during or after the fight, not to mention the countless people that just hang out and chat in local. You also have to realize three things about Eve. 1. most people don't take the game as seriously as you obviously do and a large junk of the vocal minority on these forums. In fact as you might expect most people that play Eve are casual gamers. 2. Many people, dare I say most people don't activly PvP or PvP only part of the time 3. A large majority of MMO players as a whole expect their to be a way to easily communicate with people in an online game as this is a standard that has exist for a very long time. I do think there needs to be some sort of solution to local being used as a tool for information gathering. It does really take away from the continuity of the game. A lot of valuable information which I and probobly many people use to determine the threat level in a current system is gathered by using the local channel and its implications reach further in the case of corp wars, alliance wars and such. I don't know if simply removing local is the solution, I think their needs to be a some way to resolve both problems. That of casual communication that is easy to use and the issue with using information gathering as a tool for players for which I don't think local was intended. Are you are gamer? www.playhardliveeasy.blogspot.com
Zirator Times of Ancar THE R0NIN	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:32:00 - [112] Originally by: Semper Sanguis Local as an intelligence tool is incredibly lame. Removing it will make the game more challenging for both hunter and prey. It'll be easier to hide, and harder to spot people sneaking. It'll make a real profession out of recon, surveillance and spying, and make ambushes viable. There is absolutely zero reason for local to exist. It benefits no one but the very extreme carebear or very extreme lazy-pirate. Just remove it already. You know what's also lame? Hiding behind an alt character to play crybaby on the forums.
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:36:00 - [113] Originally by: Semper Sanguis I'd imagine a single guard on look-out duty would suffice to get early warning on any hostiles, much like local does right now, except that players do it instead. And if we're talking about players mining, it won't mean lower earnings, just higher charges across the board since everyone is effected equally. i.e, having a watch/guard around without local is much more valuable than having one around with local, since local makes the watch/guard pretty much redundant. Yes but that isn't how people operate out there at the moment. Removal of local is a much bigger change than, say, WTZ was. Originally by: Semper Sanguis Frankly, this would be a great opportunity of new pilots who can't mine as hard or fight as hard to find work in 0.0 as "spotters". Local simply spoils any prospect of such occupations by giving everyone perfect intelligence for nothing in return. Well I can't agree. Sitting for hours on a gate watching for activity which 99.9% of the time is a friendly and 0.1% of the time might be someone who is going to gank you isn't much fun. Nobody is going to want to do it and anyone who does is likely going to be alseep so no use anyway. It isn't quite "nothing" either - there is a significant cognitive burden involved in having to always be vigilant, even if it sounds like a simple thing to do. Originally by: Semper Sanguis Well we'll have to disagree then, because I believe those crap belts were put there for people who do not have the strength/smarts/friends or any other resource to mine or npc anywhere else. When such people attempt to move up the ladder of return without covering their asses on the ladder of risk, people die and crying ensues. Two things here: the crap belts in 0.0 may be 1 jump from an outpost, maybe 10. Remember: the outposts were put where they were for a reason. It simply isn't worth it to mine Hemorphite in 0.0 10 jumps away from an outpost or station, so most of 0.0 is completely free of miners. Secondly, the ladder of risk actually decreases as you move towards the 0.0 centers of population (the outposts). In effect the worst resources are the most dangerous to collect. Originally by: Semper Sanguis True, under the condition that the ambushers know where to look. I'd probably have to suggest a further nerfing of the map averages so that miners and such are less visible, but mainly, without local, a hunting party HAS to scan every system for targets and cannot go around indexing prey according to local numbers. I honestly think that even after narrowing down the possible favorable areas, the factor of visibility is hugely diminished, especially for smaller groups. Yes, but first you need to spread resources and regularly move them around. This would also be more fun for the miners, because they would have to scout their rocks as well. There are so many other things to think about too: what about travelling to/from empire? At the moment you have some indication of a level of threat from local when you jump into a system. This allows you to either jump to the next gate (friendlies or empty), or safe-spot (unknown). It isn't realistic to expect every player action to require a gang to make sure it's successful or at least less risky. Although people group together into corporations/alliances a lot of their work is solo/small groups. People tend to do their own thing and come together for big events (apart from the specialist corps). I think removing local would be good for many aspects of gameplay, but would seriously disrupt day-to-day activity, which is what many players log in for.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:45:00 - [114] Let's see, new super easy scanning, then remove local... Hrm why not just say REMOVE anyone not in a 0.0 alliance from 0.0, and then follow it up with a whiney post about how to get more people into 0.0 for you to gank... sorry gankers already have a tremendous advantage over any player doing something that isnt pvp, and that is not enough for you? Wait just ask CCP to randomly teleport people out of empire to some remote spot right in front of your gang for you to pwn, seems anything less than that is too much work for you...
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:52:00 - [115] Originally by: BurnHard Well I can't agree. Sitting for hours on a gate watching for activity which 99.9% of the time is a friendly and 0.1% of the time might be someone who is going to gank you isn't much fun. Nobody is going to want to do it and anyone who does is likely going to be alseep so no use anyway. It isn't quite "nothing" either - there is a significant cognitive burden involved in having to always be vigilant, even if it sounds like a simple thing to do. I canÆt see how pulling gate sentry duty is any different from mining itself. Hear and see the gate activate, wait for ship/s to de-cloak, check overview for corp/alli, ship types, ss, etc.; alert mining op or go back to reading your book. Cognitive burden indeed. Originally by: BurnHard There are so many other things to think about too: what about travelling to/from empire? At the moment you have some indication of a level of threat from local when you jump into a system. This allows you to either jump to the next gate (friendlies or empty), or safe-spot (unknown). It isn't realistic to expect every player action to require a gang to make sure it's successful or at least less risky. You could safespot and scan the gate you need to jump through. ThatÆs pretty basic stuff. ...
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:58:00 - [116] Originally by: Razin I canÆt see how pulling gate sentry duty is any different from mining itself. Hear and see the gate activate, wait for ship/s to de-cloak, check overview for corp/alli, ship types, ss, etc.; alert mining op or go back to reading your book. Cognitive burden indeed. No, at the moment you have to keep an eye on local, ensure your cans don't get full or timeout - watch for roid-pop and ensure NPC's don't spank you. If you are advanced, you might also have to manage your crystals ;). Each may be a rather mundane activity, but having to do all together is not. Originally by: Razin You could safespot and scan the gate you need to jump through. ThatÆs pretty basic stuff. You are of course suggesting a huge increase in LAG due to scanning. Also consider that it can sometimes take hours to get through choke points in the first instance, even with local (a waiting game, especially if your crew are in deep 0.0 and you are coming from empire) - if you had to scan each gate from a 1/2 point in every single system on your route I'm sure the 0.0 population would shrink considerably. In fact, I'm losing the will to live just thinking about it.
Extinctor Fortis Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:12:00 - [117] The players opposed to removing local chat keep hammering on the same points, and despite each one having been addressed, the torrent of duplicate posts continues. Here are a list of some of the arguments on why removing local chat as a tactical tool is a 'bad idea': 1. Without the ability to chat in local, there would be no socialization and EVE would feel empty. - "Removing local" does not mean removing the ability to chat in it. It means removing its tactical role. Those still interested in using it for communications, socialization and whatnot can. The second reason why this argument does not hold: People seldom use it for chat in lowsec and 0.0 areas. When they do its usually smacktalk. High sec is a completely different environment. Unless you are at war, its primary role is that of a chat channel and as far as I am aware - no one has suggested we do anything to local chat in high sec. 2. This would benefit pirates way too much. - Local chat is the number one tool of piracy. It tells them instantly whether they should stop and look for the target, or keep moving. Pirates could very much end up overlooking you, if you are clever enough to mine in a planet which is far outside scan range of any other object. Aggressors would have to work for their kills just as much as defenders would have to work for their safety. 3. Recreational, casual, soloers, PVEers, freelancers and small timers will be screwed. - These players typically don't contest the bigger alliances for their territory anyways, they hide and sneak through it. They try to be invisible and unimportant, or else there is no way to turn a profit. This would be the best thing to ever happen to smaller groups. If anyone is driven out of harder territories, its because they are unwilling to put forth the extra effort of obtaining proper scouts and treading with greater care. Guess what? It will be met with a proportionately sized exodus of pirates/gankers who are unwilling to put forth the extra effort in finding targets. 4. This is only benefiting the hardcore. - No. It is benefiting those who do not fear teamwork, and have some intelligent preplanning capabilities. Hardcore is used to describe someone who takes the game very seriously and spends incredible amounts of time playing it. You don't have to do any of those things to have the same chance. And if you are one of those 'hardcore' that plays a lot, well, that is no guarantee you will not get ganked. This holds especially true if said person only plays for themselves and does not rely on anyone for assistance. 5. I don't want to sit there mashing my "scan" button just to see if there are hostiles. - Then don't. Mine in a dead end system, post a security detail with covert ops next door on the inbound gate - nothing will get into that system undetected, including cloaked ships. The same cannot be said for mashing the scanner repeatedly. 6. This is only a whine by pirates, gankers and people who are looking for easy kills. - Such statements are not really an argument against removing local, its closer to trolling than anything. What makes you able to say such things? Some of the most experienced players, groups, and alliances in EVE have agreed on this issue - and yet - whenever it is raised it is always the lowlife griefers responsible? Please. There are such things as carebear pirates. They look for easy kills and avoid risk themselves, and this is in direct opposition to their gameplay.
Extinctor Fortis Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:12:00 - [118] 7. Everyone would leave 0.0. EVE will die. The end is near. - Telling fortunes makes you a forum gypsy, and not to be taken seriously in any capacity. 0.0 is only as brutal as the players make it. The wild west is not what robbed the train of its gold, and ransacked the Sheriff's house. If people start fearing the dangers of 0.0, the likely outcome is they'll form even more coalitions, alliances, and NAPs to secure their safety. If people start leaving because they can't handle it, that only opens up room for newcomers to make their first steps into the fringe. There will always be equilibrium between 0.0 and empire, and the equivalence point is based on the relative profit differences. If 0.0 is no longer "worth the effort", start removing lvl 4 agents from high sec adn you'll see how much more enticing it gets. Either way, the end is not nigh. Nostradamus was good at seeing the future, and even he was wrong most of the time. You are not Nostradamus. 8. This change will ruin the game for those who play for the PVE & social interactions only. - There is a deeper meaning behind such statements as these. I have heard them over and over, and for the longest time I struggled to assertain just exactly what the hell it mean. Some questions that come to mind: Do you accept that EVE is a PVP game? Do you avoid it? Do you stay in empire to avoid it? If you stay in empire, why are you commenting on matters you have no experience in nor have intention of experiencing? Do you believe you have a right to be in lowsec? Do you think you should have to fight for that right? Do you think resource competition is a greater form of interaction than casual chatter? Will your game be ruined because you were forced to fight? How does removing local chat force you to fight? Many questions indeed. In the end I can only conclude that most outspoken critics of removing local chat as a tactical tool, among other similar topics (instajumps, agents in high sec) must consider EVE to be "challenging enough" to dissaprove of anything which makes it more difficult. Then I must question if people are joining EVE seeking to win, or seeking fun. They must know that MMORPGs seldom have a method in which you could actually win and beat the game. More often they have an endgame scenario, and that is only a function of poor game design. EVE does not have, or need an endgame, but that is exactly what local is striving to do. It creates an artificial roadblock to how far players can go, and thus creating an upper limit to how much fun they can have. Local chat is nothing but the lvl 100 cap for player skill.
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:29:00 - [119] Originally by: BurnHard No, at the moment you have to keep an eye on local, ensure your cans don't get full or timeout - watch for roid-pop and ensure NPC's don't spank you. If you are advanced, you might also have to manage your crystals ;). Each may be a rather mundane activity, but having to do all together is not. I have not mined in over three years so my recollection of the activity may be outdated. IÆm glad that some find it very involving though since someone has to do it to keep the market prices from climbing. However this does not say anything about the problem of the ôcognitive burdenö on the gate sentry. Seems that if done in shifts and generously compensated (for a newb, since itÆs a job for one), it wonÆt require that much of a change in the mining paradigm. Originally by: BurnHard You are of course suggesting a huge increase in LAG due to scanning. Also consider that it can sometimes take hours to get through choke points in the first instance, even with local (a waiting game, especially if your crew are in deep 0.0 and you are coming from empire) - if you had to scan each gate from a 1/2 point in every single system on your route I'm sure the 0.0 population would shrink considerably. In fact, I'm losing the will to live just thinking about it. You are assuming a huge increase of lag due to an assumed significant increase in scanning activity. Can this alleged consequence even come close to the insta BMs and buddy lists influence on server latency? ThatÆs for CCP to tell. The time spent scanning the next gate wonÆt significantly add to the time spent waiting out a gate camp. If youÆre running a mining op then sending an alt scout ahead shouldnÆt be that much of an increase in your management burden. The will to live is easily restored by interaction with the opposite sex. ...
Razin	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:27:00 - [120] Originally by: Extinctor Fortis ...Excellent summary... Very well put. ...
Lisa Lightyear	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:29:00 - [121] I think the best way to describe my argument would be to load up eve and hit the map button, zoom out a little, pick an 0.0 region and zoom in on it, take a look at all those solar systems, count how many jumps it takes to get to one side of the region to the other if you want, then take a look at a neighbouring region (presumably hostile to the first one) and count how many solar systems exist between them, now ask yourself how anyone will be able to PVP if they can't find anyone to PVP with because they're stuck wondering around a 5000 solar system region wearing a blindfold playing hide a seek with an enemy theyÆre not sure is even there. Your solutions to this little problem are neither practical nor realistic, life in 0.0 space would revert back to that of the stone age. It would cause pipes and chokepoints to become over-camped, 0.0 space would be infested with squatters and isk farmers, no-one would be able to find anyone, markets would be effected negatively, life as it is in 0.0 would come screeching to a halt and quite frankly suck.
Meeko Gloom Gallente Republic	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:46:00 - [122] I would like to see local still around but have a 2-3 min delay... -------------------------- Guns dont Kill People Drones Do
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.12.05 06:46:00 - [123] Go ahead remove local, might as well finish off the carebearification of 0.0. then noone will come into your 0.0 space and you can carebear along without interuption, meanwhile you will post an alt at the gate to do the same thing local did, just you will have a new mechaniism to do the same thing. Meanwhile all you supposed leet pvp'ers will become so **** scared to do anything you will just keep forming bigger and bigger gangs to travel in safety, while using smaller and cheaper ships to avoid much losses.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.